
Background at Business Insider and apology at Ride-Smart.org
Andrew
Latest Reviews and Articles
Postby Ozkaban » Tue Nov 13, 2012 3:29 pm
Postby The 2nd Womble » Tue Nov 13, 2012 9:19 pm
Postby human909 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:36 am
Postby Aushiker » Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:30 am
Aushiker wrote:... apology at Ride-Smart.org
Postby wellington_street » Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:32 pm
human909 wrote:Regarding running red lights.... Its not a safety campaign, it is an obedience campaign.
Postby gorilla monsoon » Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:52 pm
Postby Xplora » Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:50 am
wellington_street wrote:human909 wrote:Regarding running red lights.... Its not a safety campaign, it is an obedience campaign.
You can say the same about any road rule for any type of vehicle at some point in time. The point of rules is to ensure predictable behaviour on the roads and avoid the creation of ambiguous or dangerous situations.
If I drive a car through a red light when there's no other traffic, is that OK? How about drive down the wrong side of the road at 2am when there's nobody around? Or go the wrong way around the roundabout? Or drive 60km/h over the speed limit on the freeway when I'm the only vehicle in sight?
All perfectly 'safe' behaviour that is very much illegal for a reason.
Postby wellington_street » Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:06 pm
Postby human909 » Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:48 pm
wellington_street wrote:Running in a red in the middle of the night may well be a victim less crime, or a matter of disobedience rather than safety, but it is socially unacceptable for a reason.
wellington_street wrote:It is also a slippery slope - run a red here, ride down the wrong side of the road there and then it becomes easier to take the next step...until you make an error in your decision making and end up maimed or injured with some poor motorist or other cyclist feeling responsible even thought it was your fault for breaking the law.
wellington_street wrote:More to the point, why do you feel the need to run the red? If there's no vehicles around, the lights change quickly.
wellington_street wrote:At what point do you decide it is OK? Is it any red light where you can quickly get across without being hit? Or is it only reds with no vehicles around? What if there's a vehicle behind you that will trigger the lights within 30 seconds, is it OK to run the red then? I'm particularly interested to hear the answers to these questions.
wellington_street wrote:However, red lights are there to be obeyed, the law doesn't allow you to make your own decision, primarily because while you may think you're capable of making a decision, others have proven themselves unable to.
wellington_street wrote:Take responsibility for your actions, not only for your own safety, but also for you future safety and reputation as a cyclist and that of others.
Postby Xplora » Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:53 pm
Postby wellington_street » Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:05 pm
Xplora wrote:We come from very different schools of thought. Humans might have bad track records, but the alternative is much worse - you can take away human decision making but that's not freedom. If you honestly didn't think people could be trusted, you wouldn't let them drive a car to start with. You wouldn't let them build an intersection that had conflicting traffic in the first place
Xplora wrote:Road rules help... they are not infallible, and they are often unenforceable. You put FAR too much trust in them.
Xplora wrote:There is a reason they teach defensive driving to learners - because mistakes happen, even when everyone is trying to do the right thing.
Xplora wrote:You are basing your views on an ASSUMPTION that we could not function without the road rules.
Postby wellington_street » Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:11 pm
human909 wrote:wellington_street wrote:Running in a red in the middle of the night may well be a victim less crime, or a matter of disobedience rather than safety, but it is socially unacceptable for a reason.
Is it socially unacceptable? Pedestrians run red lights all the time. Motorists are often seen running early reds. Personally amongst all my friends, peers and colleagues I've never had the impression that ignoring road rules is socially unacceptable. However behaving dangerously on the roads is socially unacceptable to myself most of my peers.![]()
human909 wrote:wellington_street wrote:More to the point, why do you feel the need to run the red? If there's no vehicles around, the lights change quickly.
I think the bigger point is why feel the need not to. On the evening described I stopped for the red light and it quickly becomes apparent that the only reason it change was to allow that police car to do that U turn. No other car in sight after it complete the U turn and accelerated off, why wait? There didn't seem my point in waiting.
human909 wrote:wellington_street wrote:At what point do you decide it is OK? Is it any red light where you can quickly get across without being hit? Or is it only reds with no vehicles around? What if there's a vehicle behind you that will trigger the lights within 30 seconds, is it OK to run the red then? I'm particularly interested to hear the answers to these questions.
If I waited at every set of lights for 30s on the trip described then it would have taken me twice as long for no apparent gain. My decision is based on a host of factors. Most importantly being is it safe and will it inconvenience or endanger anybody. If the answer to these is YES&NO then I will consider it.
human909 wrote:wellington_street wrote:However, red lights are there to be obeyed, the law doesn't allow you to make your own decision, primarily because while you may think you're capable of making a decision, others have proven themselves unable to.
Traffic lights are just as much about traffic flow regulation as they are about safety. If there is almost no traffic they aren't really needed.
human909 wrote:wellington_street wrote:Take responsibility for your actions, not only for your own safety, but also for you future safety and reputation as a cyclist and that of others.
I am taking responsibility of my actions.
Postby human909 » Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:25 pm
wellington_street wrote:Because it is against the road rules. That's the default position and if I were to break the road rules, I would need to find justification to do so, not the other way around.
human909 wrote:Do you then expect motorists to obey the road rules when around you?
Postby wellington_street » Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:22 pm
Postby Xplora » Fri Nov 16, 2012 11:17 pm
wellington_street wrote:I certainly drive and cycle with safety as my top priority but I'm not sure how that relates to thinking it OK to run red lights.
Postby chucknitro » Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:23 am
Postby wellington_street » Mon Nov 19, 2012 4:02 pm
Xplora wrote:..but if you can't see that going through an empty intersection after thoroughly checking all entries and exits has no risk because someone installed a traffic light, then I am concerned for you, because you are displaying the EXACT failure of human decision making that you are trying to attribute to others.
Postby human909 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 4:43 pm
wellington_street wrote:I just don't agree with the attitude that it is OK to break the road rules for no other reason than because I don't want to be delayed for a few seconds.
Postby LM324 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 5:47 pm
Postby uncle arthur » Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:21 pm
Postby Xplora » Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:32 pm
Philipthelam wrote:Xplora, I don't see why you got Oxford into this seeing as he is against cyclists running red lights...
Postby human909 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:44 pm
Philipthelam wrote:"I'll just save some time here on my commute". That's the same mentality of the motorists that don't bother waiting behind a cyclist until it is safe to pass.
Postby LM324 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 7:57 pm
uncle arthur wrote:I'm surprised no one has mentioned helmets here yet..........
Postby LM324 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:07 pm
Xplora wrote:Philipthelam wrote:Xplora, I don't see why you got Oxford into this seeing as he is against cyclists running red lights...
Because some forum members have extremely bad experiences despite doing the right thing and obeying the rules... and we need as many people as possible being concerned about safety, more than rules. I can legitimately hospitalise a pedestrian who walks in front of my bike on most road areas. Is this the best move? Wouldn't safer speeds be better?
Rules are only guidelines. Wellington makes a reasonable point, but it has been shown to be incorrect. The red issue is NOT a few seconds, and it impacts on no one. The close shaved cyclists issue IS a few seconds, and it can kill people. I'll let you decide if this is reasonable to compare them.
Return to “Cycling Safety and Advocacy”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.